{"id":3153,"date":"2014-08-14T14:12:57","date_gmt":"2014-08-14T13:12:57","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.arbitrage-maritime.org\/CAMP-V3\/?p=3153"},"modified":"2016-06-08T07:58:02","modified_gmt":"2016-06-08T06:58:02","slug":"award-1221","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.arbitrage-maritime.org\/CAMP-V3\/2014\/08\/14\/award-1221\/","title":{"rendered":"Award 1221"},"content":{"rendered":"<p><strong>Award 1221 \u2013 T\/C NYPE 1946 \u2013 English law \u2013 Claimant shipowner \u2013 Off-hire for cranes breakdowns \u2013 Crane damaged by stevedores \u2013 Claim for shortage \u2013 Inter Club Agreement application (no) \u2013 <\/strong>Partial adjournment of decision (no). The dispute was about three main items : (1) the off-hire periods deducted by the charterer following breakdowns of ship cranes, (2) the damage to one crane during discharging caused by stevedores, (3) a ship owner claim related to the Inter Club Agreement. On the off-hire periods for crane breakdowns, the arbitrators applied an additional clause which, contrary to the printed clause of the charter-party, did not charge the ship owner for the bunkers spent when the hire was reduced proportionally to the number of available cranes and reinstated the periods wrongly deducted when a shore crane was supplied by the ship owner in the place of a broken down crane. They declared the charterer liable for the damage to the crane caused by stevedores and its consequences. Finally, they dismissed for lack of evidence the ship owner\u2019s claim,\u00a0relying upon the Inter Club Agreement, concerning the refund of 50 % of a deductible paid to his P &amp; I Club following a claim for shortage, which was the object of another arbitration, and refused to adjourn their decision on this point in view of the indivisibility of the proceedings.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Award 1221 \u2013 T\/C NYPE 1946 \u2013 English law \u2013 Claimant shipowner \u2013 Off-hire for cranes breakdowns \u2013 Crane damaged by stevedores \u2013 Claim for shortage \u2013 Inter Club Agreement application (no) \u2013 Partial adjournment of decision (no). The dispute was about three main items : (1) the off-hire periods deducted by the charterer following<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_monsterinsights_skip_tracking":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_active":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_note":"","_monsterinsights_sitenote_category":0,"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-3153","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-non-classe"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.arbitrage-maritime.org\/CAMP-V3\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3153","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.arbitrage-maritime.org\/CAMP-V3\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.arbitrage-maritime.org\/CAMP-V3\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.arbitrage-maritime.org\/CAMP-V3\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.arbitrage-maritime.org\/CAMP-V3\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=3153"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/www.arbitrage-maritime.org\/CAMP-V3\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3153\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":3155,"href":"https:\/\/www.arbitrage-maritime.org\/CAMP-V3\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3153\/revisions\/3155"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.arbitrage-maritime.org\/CAMP-V3\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=3153"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.arbitrage-maritime.org\/CAMP-V3\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=3153"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.arbitrage-maritime.org\/CAMP-V3\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=3153"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}